Gaza under attack yet again.

[SpackleFrog]

We are both reading different pages from the same book. This is what religion has always been about.

Now you're trying to subtly alter what you said. We are not reading the same book; I'm trying to develop a materialist understanding of what's happening, you're saying it's all about religion.

 

[uk benzo]

Are you also not entitled to comment on the Tories? What about Likud? They won an election, can you comment on them? I'm really sorry pal, I didn't realise you weren't allowed to voice an opinion on half of this stuff.



You used the phrase conflict a few posts back. I'm not sure where the discussion can really go at this point.

I didn't say you can't voice an opinion. I will continue to voice a neutral opinion. I am a Palestinian living in the West with the comforts that come with living in the West. I cannot fathom the shit that the Palestinians in Ghazza have to deal with to have voted for Hamas. It's not a choice I think they took lightly. And as such, I will not disagree with their choice.

I agree, discussing this matter with you has become circular.

 

[quiquaquo]

Stay on track - Zionism isn't driven by religion.

With respect that's nitpicking in the extreme. Religion and so called Jewish ethnicity are inescapably linked according to both the religious and the nationalists.

We've had Christian Fascism as in Franco's Spain and Israel is just Jewish Fascism whether you take it from a religious or nationalist perspective.

It needs to be consigned to the dustbin of history asap.

 

[TomUS]

The guerilla tactics have prevented the zionist entity from rolling in and occupying the strip. They tried it at the beginning of this murderous rampage and were beaten back. Hence the entity uses blanket bombardment from afar.

Sure the Palestinians could all lie down on the floor in the strip in the hope that emulating Ghandi will make the zionists see sense.

I doubt Israel ever had any intention of re-occupying Gaza. They're content with controlling the borders & maintaining it as a prison camp.

Hamas provides very poor leadership. Using violence against a force 1000 times stronger is just stupid. Hamas has bragged that it captured the 3 Israeli teenagers that were killed & called it a "heroic operation." What more could Netanyahu ask for? Ghandi style non violent resistance in Gaza & the WB would result in a brutal response by Israel but would be far more effective. It kicked the British out of India.

 

[uk benzo]

Now you're trying to subtly alter what you said. We are not reading the same book; I'm trying to develop a materialist understanding of what's happening, you're saying it's all about religion.

Ohh ffs, I have not subtly changed any of my opinions. I am trying to find common ground with you so that we can come to an understanding. But if you want to relentlessly push two concepts as far apart from each other, go right ahead. I have better things to do with my time.

BW,

Benzo

 

[nino_savatte]

I doubt Israel ever had any intention of re-occupying Gaza. They're content with controlling the borders & maintaining it as a prison camp.

Hamas provides very poor leadership. Using violence against a force 1000 times stronger is just stupid. Hamas has bragged that it captured the 3 Israeli teenagers that were killed & called it a "heroic operation." What more could Netanyahu ask for? Ghandi style non violent resistance in Gaza & the WB would result in a brutal response by Israel but would be far more effective. It kicked the British out of India.

Again, this is not just about Hamas. There are other Palestinian groups, some of them like the Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades of the PFLP and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are operating in Gaza too. Israel wants to present this as a fight between good (Israel) and evil (Hamas). This is about Israel versus the Palestinians. What Hamas does or does not do is a distraction imo.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

It kicked the British out of India.

It really didn't.

 

[uk benzo]

I doubt Israel ever had any intention of re-occupying Gaza. They're content with controlling the borders & maintaining it as a prison camp.

Hamas provides very poor leadership. Using violence against a force 1000 times stronger is just stupid. Hamas has bragged that it captured the 3 Israeli teenagers that were killed & called it a "heroic operation." What more could Netanyahu ask for? Ghandi style non violent resistance in Gaza & the WB would result in a brutal response by Israel but would be far more effective. It kicked the British out of India.

Please be factual about this. It was a loosely affiliated cell that perpetrated the murder of those three kids- all violence against children should be deemed moralistically disgusting. Just as the the IDF has murdered plenty of unarmed innocent Palestinian children (as young as 7) in the West bank, well before this recent savage attack.

The British in India were losing their global grip on everything- they were no longer an empire when India won its independence. As long as the US is a global superpower that blindingly supports the zionist entity, no amount of passive resistance will make a difference.

 

[Red Cat]

Now you're trying to subtly alter what you said. We are not reading the same book; I'm trying to develop a materialist understanding of what's happening

And yet it's you that's excluding organised religion from a materialist understanding.

 

[Pickman's model]

I doubt Israel ever had any intention of re-occupying Gaza. They're content with controlling the borders & maintaining it as a prison camp.

Hamas provides very poor leadership. Using violence against a force 1000 times stronger is just stupid. Hamas has bragged that it captured the 3 Israeli teenagers that were killed & called it a "heroic operation." What more could Netanyahu ask for? Ghandi style non violent resistance in Gaza & the WB would result in a brutal response by Israel but would be far more effective. It kicked the British out of India.

no, it didn't

next

 

[Pickman's model]

Please be factual about this. It was a loosely affiliated cell that perpetrated the murder of those three kids- all violence against children should be deemed moralistically disgusting. Just as the the IDF has murdered plenty of unarmed innocent Palestinian children (as young as 7) in the West bank, well before this recent savage attack.

The British in India were losing their global grip on everything- they were no longer an empire when India won its independence. As long as the US is a global superpower that blindingly supports the zionist entity, no amount of passive resistance will make a difference.

so despite having much of africa not to mention parts of north, central and south america, hong kong etc etc there was no british empire in 1948. eh?

 

[uk benzo]

so despite having much of africa not to mention parts of north, central and south america, hong kong etc etc there was no british empire in 1948. eh?

You are right. The British Empire still had some sizeable colonies in 1948, but couldn't afford to manage them, which is why after 500 years of empire building, post-1945, it all came to a quick finish in relative terms.

 

[Mr.Bishie]

Al Basha, a 14 floor residential block flattened by F-16s last night;

@MomenShataly Yesterday Israel flattened 4 residential towers in #Gaza containing at least 300 apartments leaving 300 families with no home.

 

[quiquaquo]

QPR fan ejected from White Hart Lane last Sunday for waving a Palestinian flag (Israeli flags are allowed). As a Ranger's fan myself can't say how much this pisses me off, bastards.

 

[SpackleFrog]

With respect that's nitpicking in the extreme. Religion and so called Jewish ethnicity are inescapably linked according to both the religious and the nationalists.

Is that who we should take our cue from is it?

Israel is just Jewish Fascism

Oh FFS, not this again...

 

[ViolentPanda]

Yes, because of how and why Hamas developed, as a reactionary religious force which enjoyed some support from the Israeli state and played a role in dislodging the previous secular Palestinian leadership, we should be suspicious of them. Very suspicious. I didn't say anything about hypocrisy, you're referring to others comments there.

I mean no disrespect (well, maybe a little!), but I think you need to take your blinkers off. Both FATAH and the current Palestinian Authority are also tainted with the same "enjoying of support" from the state of Israel.
And of course HAMAS played a role in dislodging "the previous secular Palestinian leadership". In a DEMOCRATIC election which was monitored by many outside observers, and found to have been legitimate. Of course, if you wish democracy to be set aside so that your preferences can be met...

 

[SpackleFrog]

I mean no disrespect (well, maybe a little!), but I think you need to take your blinkers off. Both FATAH and the current Palestinian Authority are also tainted with the same "enjoying of support" from the state of Israel.

Of course, and I wouldn't deny that at all.

And of course HAMAS played a role in dislodging "the previous secular Palestinian leadership". In a DEMOCRATIC election which was monitored by many outside observers, and found to have been legitimate. Of course, if you wish democracy to be set aside so that your preferences can be met...

I'm getting sick of this. Obviously someone coming from a Marxist perspective will be critical of most elected governments. I'm critical of the Democrats in the US, of the ANC in South Africa, of the Socialist Party in France and of the Tories in Britain.

Why does it upset people to hear criticism of a democratically elected government in Palestine but nowhere else? It would be mad if I said we couldn't criticise US or Israeli imperialism because they have 'democratic' governments; what changes when we discuss the Palestinian position?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Hamas has the backing in comparison to who? Fatah? The Israeli state? What has the election got to do with it?

What it has to do with the elections is that victory suggests that HAMAS has a mandate from the people of Gaza. I've seen nothing to suggest otherwise, either, and FATAH themselves have accepted HAMAS's writ in Gaza.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

Why does it upset people to hear criticism of a democratically elected government in Palestine but nowhere else? It would be mad if I said we couldn't criticise US or Israeli imperialism because they have 'democratic' governments; what changes when we discuss the Palestinian position?

Probably because you use phrases such as 'and played a role in dislodging the previous secular Palestinian leadership' which is along the same lines of 'Hamas seized power in the Gaza strip' used by mainstream media. Yeah fine I think we're all in agreement with criticising a democratically elected government but you, either consciously or unconsciously, use terms and phrases similar or identical to those used by the hasbara propaganda machine. That's why you're repeatedly being picked up on in this thread. If you're getting sick of it then stop doing it and instead use terms normally used for democratically elected governments, like voted out of power.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Of course, and I wouldn't deny that at all.



I'm getting sick of this. Obviously someone coming from a Marxist perspective will be critical of most elected governments. I'm critical of the Democrats in the US, of the ANC in South Africa, of the Socialist Party in France and of the Tories in Britain.

Why does it upset people to hear criticism of a democratically elected government in Palestine but nowhere else? It would be mad if I said we couldn't criticise US or Israeli imperialism because they have 'democratic' governments; what changes when we discuss the Palestinian position?

Because if you look into the questioning of legitimacy, it falls on very few democratically-elected governments. HAMAS's government in Gaza being one of them, and for reasons mostly not connected to governance, but to external ideologies being unable to accept HAMAS's legitimacy. When "other governments" are critiqued, it's very seldom to do with legitimacy, and almost always to do with critique of POLICY. The two issues are entirely separate.

As for you getting sick, do you think I don't get sick of people not being able to grok the difference between questions of policy and questions of legitimacy?

 

[ViolentPanda]

We have empires led by religion (Muslim and Christian- what were the crusades?), wars driven by religion, battles in the name of religion.

I think that's a bit simplistic, as on both sides of the Crusades, the volume of religious influence differed. Religious influence was more diffuse and indirect on Islam's side, than on the Christian side, where the Holy See in effect "co-chaired" any policy decisions made by the ruling classes of the crusading states, and exercised a high volume of influence not only on policy, but on the actions of soldiers (the "indemnifying" of soldiers' souls against breaking the commandment against murder, for example, which allowed soldiers to kill Muslims without it affecting their consciences).

 

[SpackleFrog]

Probably because you use phrases such as 'and played a role in dislodging the previous secular Palestinian leadership' which is along the same lines of 'Hamas seized power in the Gaza strip' used by mainstream media. Yeah fine I think we're all in agreement with criticising a democratically elected government but you, either consciously or unconsciously, use terms and phrases similar or identical to those used by the hasbara propaganda machine. That's why you're repeatedly being picked up on in this thread. If you're getting sick of it then stop doing it and instead use terms normally used for democratically elected governments, like voted out of power.

Oh FFS. Hamas developed in opposition to the PLO with the help of Israeli state support and the failures of the PLO itself and in doing so developed a wide swathe of Palestinian; that's where it's legitimacy springs from. The election came later and it meant very little other than confirming that. If you want to nitpick because you feel like I use words that sound a little bit like words used in propaganda fine but I reckon you'll find it serves Hasbera far better when people like QQQ use phrases like 'Jewish Fascism'.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Because if you look into the questioning of legitimacy, it falls on very few democratically-elected governments. HAMAS's government in Gaza being one of them, and for reasons mostly not connected to governance, but to external ideologies being unable to accept HAMAS's legitimacy. When "other governments" are critiqued, it's very seldom to do with legitimacy, and almost always to do with critique of POLICY. The two issues are entirely separate.

As for you getting sick, do you think I don't get sick of people not being able to grok the difference between questions of policy and questions of legitimacy?

Tell me where I've talked about legitimacy. I haven't said anything about it. Tell me what the fuck grok means and all, it sounds rude.

I think some people on this thread would rather repeat the same discussions they are used to rather than having than have new ones. It all falls into the same patterns. "Hamas are democratically elected! Palestinians have the right to defend themselves!"

Lets take those things as undisputed facts that nobody in their right mind would disagree with and then lets try to dig a bit deeper.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The Israel/Palestine conflict is not a result of religion, that at least should be clear.

Religion has certainly been implicated, since even before the foundation of the state of Israel, and has also been called on by both sides at various times as a "rallying cry". No, the conflict isn't a result of a religious clash, but it is the result of a cultural clash between two "sides", a majority of whom happen to be either nominally or devoutly (as in observant, not fanatical) religious.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The Israel/Palestine conflict is not a result of religion, that at least should be clear.

Religion has certainly been implicated, since even before the foundation of the state of Israel, and has also been called on by both sides at various times as a "rallying cry". No, the conflict isn't a result of a religious clash, but it is the result of a cultural clash between two "sides", a majority of whom happen to be either nominally or devoutly (as in observant, not fanatical) religious, and that means that religion does affect any politics between the two "sides".

 

[ViolentPanda]

Tell me where I've talked about legitimacy.

Every time you make a remark about HAMAS and their rule, you're questioning their legitimacy. Every time you assert FATAH or the Palestinian Authority's "fitness for the job" over HAMAS's, you question their legitimacy.

I haven't said anything about it. Tell me what the fuck grok means and all, it sounds rude.

It means "understand".
And as for "rude", the only rude thing here is you, with your peremptory demands.

I think some people on this thread would rather repeat the same discussions they are used to rather than having than have new ones. It all falls into the same patterns. "Hamas are democratically elected! Palestinians have the right to defend themselves!"

Lets take those things as undisputed facts that nobody in their right mind would disagree with and then lets try to dig a bit deeper.

I think that you have a firm conviction of what is right for Gaza, and that argument won't sway you from your convictions. I also think your convictions are un-nuanced, inflexible and reactionary, and that you've barely bothered to take in anything anyone else has had to say on this thread.

 

[ViolentPanda]

This thread that has repeatedly pointed out the fact that the zionist state is racist because it openly proclaims that it is a Jewish state?

"Jewish" isn't "Judaist". The "Jewish state" nonsense in the Declaration is based on culture, rather than religious adherence - fortunate for the Zionists, as many Orthodox Jews refuse to make Aliyah, and see the state of Israel as an insult to Judaism.
It is, however, a "racist" state insofar as it asserts the hegemony of one culture over another, and is racist in practice even against Jews, if they happen to be relict, or to be Misrahim.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Zionism has nothing to do with religion? Some zionists may not be religious but the vast majority are be they Jewish or Christian.

I'd disagree with "vast majority" with regard to Jews, simply because although they may be "observant" (i.e. attend synagogue occasionally, and celebrate the festivals), they do so as part of their cultural heritage, in much the same way as an Anglo Protestant who only does "births, marriages, death and Christmas" does. The number of Jewish Zionists who are devout and/or Orthodox is relatively-small, because Judaism is quite clear about when, how and why Jews should return to the Chosen land, and it has nothing to do with the reasons that jewish nationalist Zionists have. Christian Zionists, on the other hand, tend to be a majority of devout and even fanatical Christian cultists, with a minority of politically-motivated (generally "neo-conservative") Zionists among them.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Every time you make a remark about HAMAS and their rule, you're questioning their legitimacy. Every time you assert FATAH or the Palestinian Authority's "fitness for the job" over HAMAS's, you question their legitimacy.

This is just batshit. Every time I make a remark about Hamas I'm "questioning their legitimacy"? Now you are openly arguing that criticism of Hamas equals an attempt to deny the election results. And WHEN have I asserted Fatah or the PA's "fitness for the job"? I guarantee you I have never in my life said such a thing. Again, you're reading other peoples arguments into what I'm saying.

It means "understand".

Thank you. In what language?

I think that you have a firm conviction of what is right for Gaza, and that argument won't sway you from your convictions. I also think your convictions are un-nuanced, inflexible and reactionary, and that you've barely bothered to take in anything anyone else has had to say on this thread.

I have my own political viewpoint certainly; I don't feel I've been met with a lot of argument but if you think there are points I should have listened too but haven't then please let me know.

Since we're doing personal assessments, here's what I think about your own views. I think you've got so used to defending Hamas against accusations of illegitimacy or liberals moaning about how they use violent means etc that now you just defend them out habit, regardless of whether you should or not. And that on the basis of that perspective, whether consciously or unconsciously, you now appear to be arguing that what is right for Gazan's is to continue to support Hamas and their ineffectual methods of resistance and to wait for the inevitable genocide while lobbing the odd rocket hopelessly over the border.

And I'm disappointed, cos I've always been impressed by your contributions on other threads.

 

[uk benzo]

An apparent major ceasefire has been announced. I'll believe it when I see it.